President’s Essay/Oratory Contest 2016
COMPETITOR’S NAME:
JUDGE’S ID:
TITLE OF ESSAY:
LENGTH (in pages and words):
CATEGORY
Thesis
Content
Organization
4 Excellent
Well developed
and defined or
workable thesis
(subject, position,
hint at
organizational
strategy) that
establishes a
clear motive for
writing.
Central
purpose/thesis
supported with
sound
generalizations
and with
substantial,
specific, and
consistently
relevant details;
content
distinctive
because of its
originality or
perceptiveness or
persuasiveness or
thoroughness;
strong reader
interest.
3 Good
Workable but
formulaic thesis
that forecasts the
direction of the
essay.
2 Fair
Reflects
components of a
thesis but not
fully developed.
Central idea
may be less
original than it
could be.
1 Poor
Thesis is poorly
defined and/or
inconsistent, or
the essay lacks a
thesis.
Accurate grasp
of writing
context;
purpose/ thesis
clearly defined
and supported
with sound
generalizations
and mostly
relevant details;
substantial
reader interest.
Routine
purpose/thesis
supported with
adequate
generalizations
and relevant
details; suitable
but predictable
content,
somewhat
sketchy or
overly general;
occasional
repetitive or
irrelevant
material; one or
two unsound
generalizations;
some reader
interest.
Very clear plan
related to thesis;
developed with
consistent
attention to
proportion,
emphasis, logical
order, and
smooth flow and
synthesis of
ideas; paragraphs
Clear plan
developed with
attention to
proportion,
emphasis, and
logical order and
synthesis of
ideas;
paragraphs
coherent,
unified, and
Conventional
plan apparent
but routinely
developed;
paragraphs
unified,
generally
coherent, but
minimally
effective in
development;
Central
purpose/thesis
lacks substantial
supporting
evidence for all
claims;
inadequate
material,
numerous
unsound
generalizations,
and or needless
repetition of
ideas;
insufficient,
unsuitable,
unclear, vague, or
insubstantial
content; minimal
or no reader
interest.
Plan not
apparent,
inappropriate,
undeveloped, or
developed with
irrelevance,
redundancy,
inconsistency, or
little order or
progression;
paragraphs
SCORE
coherent, unifies,
and effectively
developed, strong
title, introduction
and conclusion.
effectively
developed;
transition
between
paragraphs
usually smooth;
effective title,
introduction and
conclusion.
several weak
topic sentences;
weak transitions
between
paragraphs,
mechanical or
monotonous;
routine title,
introduction and
conclusion.
Sentences
Sentences
skillfully
constructed:
unified, coherent,
forceful,
effectively
varied: deftness
in coordinating,
subordinating,
and emphasizing
ideas;
harmonious
agreement of
content and
sentence design;
very strong,
though not
necessarily
completely free
of errors.
Sentences
correctly and
coherently
constructed with
some variety;
capability in
coordinating,
subordinating,
and emphasizing
ideas; few errors
even in
complicated
patterns; strong.
Word Use and
Tone
Diction
distinctive; fresh,
precise, concrete,
economical, and
idiomatic; word
form mastery;
appropriate,
consistent, and
engaging tone.
Clear diction;
accurate,
efficient, and
idiomatic; minor
errors in word
form or
occasional
weakness in
work choice, but
clear;
appropriate and
generally
consistent tone.
Sentences
constructed
clearly and
correctly but
lacking in
variety; minimal
skill in
coordinating and
subordinating
ideas; clarity
weakened by
occasional
awkward,
garbled,
incomplete,
fused,
improperly
predicated or
comma spliced
sentences; some
errors in
modification;
acceptable.
Diction
adequate:
generally
accurate,
appropriate, and
idiomatic, but
often
predictable,
wordy, or
imprecise;
clarity
weakened by
several errors in
subject-verb
agreement,
pronoun
agreement,
frequently
incoherent,
underdeveloped,
or not unified;
transition
between
paragraphs
unclear or
ineffective; weak
and ineffective
title, introduction
and conclusion.
Sentences marred
frequently enough
to annoy or
frustrate the
reader; numerous
sentences
incoherent, fused,
incomplete,
comma spliced or
incorrectly
predicated;
excessively
monotonous or
simple
constructions;
unacceptable.
Diction
unacceptable;
vague
inappropriate,
unidiomatic, or
substandard
language that
distracts the
reader or
obscures content
more often than
is comfortable;
numerous errors
in word form.
Punctuation
and
Mechanics:
Clarity and
effectiveness of
expression
promoted by
consistent use of
standard
punctuation
(including the
punctuation of
citations),
capitalization
and/or spelling.
Critical
Thinking
Paper
demonstrates an
excellent ability
to reason both
inductively and
deductively, a
full
understanding of
the process of
analysis and
evaluation.
Excellent use of
primary and
secondary
sources; clear and
accurate
acknowledgement of sources.
Research and
Use of Sources
Flow of
communication
occasionally
diverted but not
confused by
errors in
standard
punctuation
(including the
punctuation of
citations) ,
capitalization,
and/or spelling.
Paper
demonstrates a
good ability to
reason both
inductively and
deductively, an
understanding of
the process of
analysis.
Good use of
primary and
secondary
sources, clear
and mostly
accurate
acknowledgement.
point of view.
Adequate clarity
and
effectiveness of
expression, but
weakened by
any combination
of errors in
punctuation
(including the
punctuation of
citations),
capitalization,
and or spelling.
Paper
demonstrates a
fair ability to
reason both
inductively and
deductively, a
fair
understanding of
the process of
analysis.
Adequate use of
primary and
secondary
sources, quotes
and paraphrases
may be
awkward;
acknowledgement not always
clear or plain.
Communication
hindered or
obscured by
frequent errors in
punctuation
(including the
punctuation of
citations),
capitalization
and/or spelling.
Paper poorly
demonstrates the
ability to reason
both inductively
and deductively,
shows little
understanding of
the process of
analysis.
Incorrect use of
primary and
secondary
sources; incorrect
or very poor
acknowledgement; plagiarism
may be a
concern.
Total:
Judge’s Comments